This report provides a synthesis of the work of the independent Expert Group of the European Commission on Social Entrepreneurship and its main findings in a context where social enterprises have gained in importance in European and national policies in recent years. We need more of these enterprises with a social “DNA”, to ensure that we build a fair, inclusive and sustainable social market. By focusing on people as much as profit, they foster a sense of social cohesion and promote the common good.

1. Social enterprises and
the social economy
going forward
A call for action from
the Commission Expert Group
on Social Entrepreneurship (GECES)
OCTOBER 2016

2. LEGAL NOTICE
This document has been prepared for the European Commission. However, it reflects the views only of the authors, and the European
Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the European Commission is responsible for the use which might
be made of the following information. This report does not engage the responsibility of the Financial Institutions mentioned therein.
For further information on GECES, please contact:
European Commission
Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs
Unit F.2: GROW-SOCIAL-ENTERPRISE@EC.EUROPA.EU
GECES website: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/social-economy/enterprises/expert-groups_en
© European Union, 2016
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged
Printed in Belgium, 2016
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers
to your questions about the European Union.
Freephone number (*) :
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (trough some operators,
phone boxes or hotels may charge you).

3. Social enterprises and
the social economy going forward
A call for action from the Commission Expert Group
on Social Entrepreneurship (GECES)
OCTOBER 2016
Unanimously approved by GECES on 14 October 2016.

4. 4
FOREWORD 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
RECOMMENDATIONS 8
A CALL FOR ACTION 9
A crucial field for the future of the European Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
The contribution of the social economy and social enterprises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Stepping stones for the social economy and social enterprises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
Working methods, goals and themes addressed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
CHAPTER 1: TOWARDS INCREASED VISIBILITY, RECOGNITION AND IDENTITY 18
Developing a sharper picture and stronger messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Nurturing a more assertive social enterprise community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
Supporting a stronger place for social enterprises in public policies and actions at all levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
CHAPTER 2: IMPROVING ACCESS TO FUNDING 24
Improving capacity building to help social enterprises find, attract and communicate with funders . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Unlocking and attracting more funding that is better suited to social enterprises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
Putting in place mechanisms and infrastructure that encourage more public funding and mobilise private funding . . . .28
CHAPTER 3: IMPROVING THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT 30
Towards a legal framework for social enterprises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31
Taking full advantage of internal market opportunities: a specific focus on mutuals and cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . .32
Social enterprises and the new public procurement rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
On State aid issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
CHAPTER 4: DRIVING INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH 36
Strengthening knowledge and impact of social enterprises and their support mechanisms globally . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
Fostering cooperation and the active involvement of the EU in international initiatives for social enterprises . . . . . . . 39
Strengthening the role of social enterprises in EU external policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40
ABBREVIATIONS 43
ANNEXES 44
Annex 1: Participants in the Expert Group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
Annex 2: On the concept of social enterprise in Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51
Annex 3: EU-level research organisations studying social enterprises and the social economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54
Annex 4: EU-level networks and organisations supporting and representing social enterprises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Annex 5: Improving access to funding: additional information on key specific recommendations and examples. . . . . . .58
Annex 6: On legal issues: additional information on key specific recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64
Annex 7: External relations: additional information on key specific recommendations and examples . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
TABLE OF CONTENTS

5. 5
S
ocial enterprises have gained in importance in European and national policies in recent years. Indeed, there is a growing
awareness that they create sustainable and inclusive growth and stimulate social innovation. By focusing on people
as much as profit, they foster a sense of social cohesion and promote the common good.
We need more of these enterprises with a social “DNA”, to ensure that we build a fair, inclusive and sustainable social market
economy.
However, the potential of the social economy and social enterprises has not yet been fully unleashed, even at a time when
Europe continues to face multiple economic, social and environmental challenges that they could help to resolve. Innovative
approaches to the social challenges we face are all the more important at a time of public budget constraints. Much more
needs to be done at all levels of public policy to optimise the framework conditions and funding support for social enterprises,
both in the EU and beyond.
The European Commission is committed to partnering with stakeholders at all levels. Indeed, we will only succeed if we
mobilise all the relevant actors - Member States, the European Parliament and, of course, stakeholders and grassroots actors.
In this spirit, the Expert Group of the European Commission on Social Entrepreneurship (GECES) was invited to discuss and
present recommendations to further develop European policies in favour of social enterprises.
This report provides a synthesis of the work of the independent Expert Group and its main findings in this context, and makes
recommendations to the full range of stakeholders; private and public, national and European.
The Commission is grateful for the advice and expertise that GECES has provided. We hope that all relevant stakeholders
will be inspired by the report and its recommendations, and that we will continue to work together, in partnership, to boost
the social economy and social enterprises.
FOREWORD
European Commissioner
for Employment, Social Affairs,
Skills and Labour Mobility
Marianne Thyssen
Vice-President for the Euro and
Social Dialogue, also in charge of
Financial Stability, Financial
Services and Capital Markets Union
Valdis Dombrovskis
European Commissioner
for Internal Market, Industry,
Entrepreneurship and SMEs
Elżbieta Bieńkowska

6. 6
T
he social economy and social enterprises represent a fundamentally new way of doing business and, as such, they
have the potential to profoundly transform the socio-economic landscape. New trends in recent years have seen the
emergence of a collaborative, circular economy, which in turn has created opportunities for the expansion of social
enterprise in Europe. The social economy and social enterprises are playing an increasingly prominent role, which has been
largely due to their ability to address some of the major challenges currently facing Europe, in particular the need to foster
sustainable and socially-inclusive economic growth and create jobs. At the same time they address more targeted objectives,
such as the refugee crisis, environmental degradation and the need to promote greater gender equality.
This report of the Commission Expert Group on Social Entrepreneurship (GECES) represents a call for action issued to the
European Commission, Member States and social enterprises organisations.
It argues for a European Action Plan for the Social Economy and Social Enterprises, which would provide new impetus
to promote an enabling environment for social enterprises and the social economy to flourish, building on their core values
such as democratic governance, social impact, innovation, profit reinvestment or the central place given to the human in
the economy. Thus enabled, social enterprises and the social economy will have an even greater impact in addressing the
challenges highlighted above and help to create a more socially equitable society in Europe.
In accordance with the mandate given to GECES, the recommendations mainly focus on social enterprises. However in many
cases, recommendations are relevant to social economy organisations more broadly.
The report proposes a series of key recommendations for policy-makers to support the development of social enterprises
and the social economy as a driver of inclusive and impactful economic growth. The report is structured according to four
key thematic areas.
The first of these areas examines ways to effectively increase the visibility and recognition of social enterprises, and to
promote a better understanding of what social enterprise means. Three recommendations are put forward in this regard. The
first calls on the European Commission, Member States and social enterprise organisations to gather stronger evidence on the
added value of social enterprises and to better communicate it, with actions encompassing data collection, the co-creation
of an EU-wide communication strategy, the sharing of social impact management know-how and tools, and the building of
better capacity to report on the social value generated by social enterprises. Secondly, to nurture a more assertive and coordi-
nated social enterprise community, the report recommends forging diverse and inclusive representative networks that make it
possible to take advantage of synergies, while promoting mutual learning. These networks could represent social enterprises
at EU level and promote a culture of co-creation when it comes to policy targeting the social economy and social enterprises.
Finally, to support a stronger place for social enterprise in public policy and actions at all levels, the Commission, along with
the Member States and their local and regional authorities, should mainstream the social economy and social enterprises
in all relevant policies, programmes and practices. Targeted actions towards this goal involve including social enterprises as
eligible entities in all relevant European funding programmes, promoting the participation of the social economy and social
enterprises in relevant European mobility schemes, and promoting mutual learning and capacity building between regional
and local authorities so as to develop integrated support strategies.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

7. 7
The second thematic area in the report deals with the development of a European economic environment that enables
the social economy and social enterprises to access finance. Recommendations in this area address the capacity building
needs, financing needs and infrastructure needs of social enterprises. Specifically, it is recommended that increased resources
be provided to training programmes, incubators and intermediaries that provide tailored capacity building support, helping
social enterprises to build their managerial skills and achieve financial sustainability. Some concrete measures to unlock
more funding that is better suited to social enterprises include awareness building among the broader funding community
about how to finance social enterprises, building capacity within the ‘impact community’, enhancing the suitability of social
investment, alleviating regulatory hurdles and the mapping of existing tax incentives associated with investment in social
enterprise in order to disseminate best practice. Public funding should continue to be directed at social enterprises and also
be used to mobilise private capital, through investment in and de-risking of social enterprise funding, as well as by putting
proper governance structures in place.
To facilitate the development of an ecosystem within which social enterprises can thrive, a number of key recommenda-
tions have been made with respect to the legal environment and the provision of legal and regulatory frameworks to
encourage the creation and development of the social economy and social enterprises. Here, it is recommended that
the Commission propose a soft legal measure to help Member States design an adequate framework to support the social
economy and social enterprises. Furthermore, cross-border operations should be stimulated for mutual organisations and
cooperatives, to enable them to use the full potential of the Internal Market to expand their activities. Public buyers should
also make the best use of the new public procurement rules and incorporate social considerations into their tendering proce-
dures. The report’s final recommendation for improving the legal environment calls for policy-makers to increase awareness
of state aid rules and their impact on social enterprises providing services of general economic interest.
The final section in the report deals with measures to help the social economy and social enterprises reach their
potential as key drivers of equitable and socially-inclusive economic growth. The aim here is to increase EU support
for social enterprises within the context of international development, with a view to achieving the post-2015 Sustainable
Development Goals. With these objectives in mind, the Commission/EEAS should contribute, through the next cycle of its
international development programmes, to a significant increase in open source intelligence about the social economy and
social enterprises. Moreover, the Commission should take a leading role in encouraging global cooperation in social enterprise
support by acting as a market convener and by fostering knowledge exchange. Furthermore, having identified overlaps and
gaps in funding, the European Union and the EEAS should mainstream tailored support in all its existing and future policies
and initiatives promoting social and economic development, in order to build supportive ecosystems for social enterprises.
These recommendations are targeted at the European Commission, EU Member States (including their local and regional
authorities) and third party countries, as well as the social enterprise community. They provide clear guidance on
how to increase the visibility of social enterprises and provide them with access to the finance they need to flourish, while
at the same time creating an enabling environment in which the social economy and social enterprises can move forward,
building on EU best practices and the accumulated experience of Member State representatives and social entrepreneurs.
By adopting this comprehensive approach, the report aims to create the conditions needed to allow the social economy and
social enterprises reach their full potential as an engine of inclusive economic growth and truly impactful social development
in Europe and worldwide.

8. 8
T
he GECES report makes 13 recommendations for concrete actions to tackle the issues currently preventing the social
economy and social enterprises from working to their full potential. These recommendations are presented below. The
associated actions are dealt with in the body of the report.
Towards increased visibility, recognition and identity
1. The European Commission, the Member States and social enterprise organisations shall gather stronger evidence
on social enterprises’ added value and communicate it better.
2. The European Commission, the Member States, regional and local authorities, and social enterprise organisations
should nurture a more assertive and coordinated social enterprise community.
3. The European Commission and Member States, as well as their local and regional authorities, should mainstream
the social enterprise dimension in relevant policies, programmes and practices. They should consult with and engage
social enterprises as much as possible in the creation of new policies and actions. Social enterprise organisations
should actively promote and use these opportunities.
Improving access to funding
4. The European Commission and Member States should provide increased resources to training programmes, incu-
bators and intermediaries that provide tailored capacity building support to social enterprises required to build their
managerial skills and to encourage their financial sustainability.
5. The European Commission, the Member States and organisations from the social enterprise funding community
should implement concrete measures to unlock and attract more funding that is better suited to social enterprises.
6. The European Commission and the Member States should continue to direct public funding to mobilise private
capital, through investment in and de-risking of social enterprise funders, as well as by putting proper governance
structures in place.
Improving the legal environment
7. The Commission should propose a soft legal measure which could help Member States design an adequate frame-
work to support the flourishing and expansion of social enterprises.
8. The Commission and the Member States should stimulate cross-border operations for mutuals and cooperatives
to enable them to use the full potential of the Internal Market in order to expand their activities.
9. Public buyers should make the best use of the new public procurement rules and insert social considerations, including
reserved contracts for the social and professional integration of disabled and disadvantaged persons (art. 20) as
well as health, social and cultural services (art.77), in their tendering procedures.
10. The Commission and the Member States should increase awareness of state aid rules and their impact on social
enterprises providing a service of general economic interest (SGEI).
Driving international development and growth
11. The European Commission/EEAS should contribute, through the next cycle of its international development pro-
grammes, to a significant and ongoing increase in open source intelligence about the social economy and social
enterprises, and support ecosystems globally.
12. The European Commission should take a leading role in fostering global cooperation to support the social economy
and social enterprises by acting as a market convener and harnessing knowledge exchange.
13. The European Union and the EEAS should mainstream tailored support in all its existing and future policies and
initiatives and international negotiations promoting social and economic development (cooperation and develop-
ment, foreign policy, trade policy, neighbourhood policy etc.) and embed social enterprises and the social economy
more broadly in strategic thinking in order to build supportive ecosystems as reflected by the pillars of the Social
Business Initiative.
RECOMMENDATIONS

9. 9
E
urope and its citizens are at a critical crossroads, where decisions affecting the livelihoods of current and future gen-
erations are at stake. Good intentions, signed agreements and postponed actions are no longer sufficient to tackle the
task at hand: research data and first-hand observations both consistently confirm that social inequality is on the rise
and environmental degradation is rampant. Regardless of our current situation, we should all be concerned by limitations
imposed on society’s capacity to ensure that all citizens reach their full potential. Therefore, both citizens and institutions
aiming to nurture their potential should be made fully aware of failed actions and have access to best practice in counter-
acting these destructive trends. For centuries the social economy and, more recently, social enterprises have paved the way
towards a society that prioritises people and the planet. They have been led by citizens working hand-in-hand with fellow
citizens, in cooperation with other key actors in society. However, the path has often been a difficult one and there are still
many obstacles to progress. In this context, public administrations and policy-makers can play a significant role in supporting
those working in the social economy, enabling them to improve conditions for citizens and the environment.
A crucial field for the future of the European Union
Social enterprises and the larger social economy help to make the social market economy real. They contribute to achieving
smart, sustainable and inclusive growth and, therefore, have a place at the heart of the Europe 2020 strategy.
Social enterprises, which employ entrepreneurial approaches to explicitly address social issues, were the main target
of the European Commission’s Social Business Initiative (SBI)1
in 2011, in which an action plan was created to address the
main obstacles in this field. In accordance with the mandate given to the Commission Expert Group on Social Entrepreneurship
(GECES), the recommendations mainly focus on social enterprises as defined in the SBI. Therefore the concept used in the
report is generally based on “social enterprises”. However in many cases, recommendations are relevant to all social economy
organisations more broadly. Indeed, this report argues for a European Action Plan for the Social Economy and Social
Enterprises, which would provide new impetus for European actions designed specifically to promote enabling ecosystems
for social enterprises, but would also include actions addressing the social economy more broadly.
With this report, GECES builds upon other recent initiatives from the Council of the European Union2
, the European
Parliament3
, the European Economic and Social Committee4
and the Committee of the Regions5
. It acknowledges the Rome
Strategy, adopted under the Italian Presidency, and the recommendations from the Strasbourg Declaration6
and the Lux-
embourg Declaration,7
which was adopted by six Member States at the conference “Boosting Social Enterprises in Europe”,
organised on 3-4 December 2015 by the Luxembourg Presidency of the Council.
1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions, Social Business Initiative, COM(2011) 682.
2 Council Conclusions (7 December 2015), Luxembourg Presidency, The promotion of the social economy as a key driver of economic and social
development in Europe, Brussels, (15071/15 SOC 711 EMPL 464).
3 European Parliament Resolution of 10 September 2015 Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation in combating unemployment, Strasbourg,
2014/2236(INI).
4 European Economic and Social Committee, Opinion of 26 October 2011, Social Entrepreneurship and Social enterprises, INT/589, and Opinion of
1 October 2009, Diverse forms of enterprises, INT/447.
5 Opinion of the Committee of the Regions from 3 December 2015, The role of the social economy in restoring economic growth and combating
unemployment, 2016/C 051/05.
6 European Commission, European Economic and Social Committee and the City of Strasbourg, Strasbourg Declaration, 16-17 January 2014.
7 Luxembourg Presidency of the Council of the European Union, Luxembourg Declaration, A roadmap towards a more comprehensive ecosystem for
social economy enterprises, adopted in Luxembourg on 4 December 2015, by France, Italy, Luxembourg, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain.
A CALL
FOR ACTION

10. 10
It is becoming increasingly difficult to deny that the current development path of industrialised countries has become a
very fraught issue. Against a backdrop of financial instability, high unemployment, and environmental challenges, the social
economy and social enterprises represent a sustainable way of doing business, with the potential to profoundly transform
the socio-economic horizon.
European integration is based on the principles of democracy, equality and diversity. The social economy and social
enterprises are exemplary in the sense that they implement unique organisational models based on the same principles.
Their strength is also based on four values, all of which have underpinned the work accomplished by GECES members: col-
laboration, solidarity, pluralism and sustainability, aiming towards the democratic principle of “one person, one vote” through
inclusive governance and real participation.
With the aim of contributing to the common good, the social economy and social enterprises offer specific tools that
can be used to tackle important social challenges. Moreover, they can contribute to reducing the social divide and acceler-
ating innovation while pursuing their overarching objective of providing a service to society. The social economy and social
enterprises must become a priority for public authorities at the European, national and local level because they embody the
power of change and have the ability to bring people back to the core of the European economy. The social economy, based
on participatory organisational forms with the goal of serving the community at large rather than seeking profit, and social
enterprises, driven by a commitment to resolve societal issues rather than make a profit for their owners or stakeholders8
,
shows that it is possible for business interests and social responsibility to converge. In 2010, the social economy9
already
provided work to 14.5 million Europeans and, according to the latest estimates, it currently accounts for 10% of jobs in the
EU and 8%10
of EU GDP.11
The social economy and social enterprises have proven to be very resilient during the economic and financial crisis in
recent years. They have demonstrated an ability to overcome multiple obstacles and to absorb shocks that affect the stability
of employment, for instance. The social economy is therefore a crucial part of the European economic landscape and needs
to be part of any European entrepreneurship or job creation agenda.
Despite their wide variety, social enterprises share at least four common features: a social or societal objective, entre-
preneurial behaviour, democratic and/or participatory governance, and the reinvestment of profits. These are mentioned in SBI
Communication of the Commission, which also stresses, rightfully, the European roots of social enterprise. These rely on the
concept of social economy and are to be found in the legal systems of several Member States. It is this common history that
brings together the GECES members today. The term “social enterprise” that is used in this Report synthesises the different
approaches in EU Member States. It is not to be understood as one single legal form of organisation, but rather as a term
encompassing a large variety of models and expressions.12
Social enterprises all depend on their national legal systems. The
report favours an inclusive and pragmatic approach in order to accelerate the development of social enterprises in Europe. A
principle of “shared”/”mutual” recognition should be studied so that each Member State can welcome “foreign” social enterprises
as such in its own system across different legislations, even if the underlying concepts and criteria differ from state to state.
According to the Luxembourg Declaration: “the European Union shall acknowledge a common understanding of the scope of
the social economy and remain respectful of its huge diversity and historical background across all the Member States”.13
8 For more details on the social economy and social enterprise definition see annex 2 of this report.
9 It should be noted that neither “Social economy” nor “Social enterprise” is a “sector”, as they represent a different way of doing business, across sectors.
10 European Economic and Social Committee, The Social Economy in the European Union, Report by José Luis Monzón and Rafael Chaves, 2012.
11 8% refers only to the social economy based on the four specific statutes (associations, cooperatives, mutuals and foundations) and doesn’t encom-
pass the fast growing social enterprises that have a traditional enterprise statute, and could be estimated at minimum 2% of GDP (although no
robust data is available).
12 For more information, see in annex 2 a summary note written by Rocío Nogales (EMES European Research Network), On the concept of social enter-
prise in Europe, April 2016.
13 Luxembourg Presidency of the Council of the European Union, Luxembourg Declaration, A roadmap towards a more comprehensive ecosystem for
social economy enterprises, adopted in Luxembourg on 4th
December 2015.

11. 11
This political vision calls for a better recognition of the social economy and social enterprises in Europe, includ-
ing in the various national legal systems, building on the traditions of each individual country. At European
level, new dynamism should be gained. The European Commission is therefore invited to study the legal and
pragmatic implications of a possible use of the “shared”/“mutual” recognition principle, whereby Member States
commit themselves to recognising the social economy/social enterprise forms included in the legal systems
of other Member States.
The contribution of the social economy
and social enterprises
If the social economy and social enterprises have become so important nowadays, it is because they have proven to be able
to engage in many and varied general interest fields of activity and tackle a variety of needs that arise in society. GECES
considers it essential to highlight five positive contributions, each showing a dimension of the potential of the social
economy and social enterprises to contribute to the development of the European Union.
1. High-quality and inclusive job creation and development
About three million jobs have been lost in the EU in net terms since the 2008 peak in the financial crisis. Given that new
jobs are mainly created by young dynamic enterprises, Europe needs more new businesses and bold actions to boost entre-
preneurship, as well as to help these businesses scale up and grow. The European Commission’s current focus on stimulating
a “climate of entrepreneurship” is therefore well-chosen and necessary for success in job creation.
In this context the social economy and social enterprises have an essential role to play: many of them operate in job
intensive business areas and in job intensive ways. The fact that maximising profit is not their driving force enables them
to maintain and even create jobs at times when traditional businesses cut them. In addition, many social enterprises have
innovated new ways of discovering, nurturing and matching talents to the right jobs, thus contributing to skills development
and the improvement of the labour force’s employability and entrepreneurship in the traditional economy. For example, in
Spain the social economy created more than 31,000 enterprises and 210,000 jobs in the 2008-2015 period. Moreover, over
the past three years the Spanish employment programme Lanzaderas14
has helped over 2,500 unemployed people to feel
empowered, work in self-help teams and tap into each other’s resources to find a job. Finally, with their innovative approaches,
the social economy and social enterprises pave the way for new job opportunities in areas that are not exploited by either
traditional businesses or by public entities.
A successful job creation agenda in Europe needs to encompass actions to boost the development of the social
economy and social enterprises, the potential of which is currently not fully exploited.
2. Social inclusion and poverty reduction
The social economy is a key actor in the EU economy and the Single Market. The social economy and social enterprises
contribute to achieving the EU’s objectives of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Furthermore, many social enterprises
are key actors in the provision of services of general interest to European citizens and, especially, to vulnerable persons.
These enterprises meet social needs with respect to access to housing, healthcare, assistance for elderly or disabled persons
and the inclusion of vulnerable groups. They also address the need for child care, access to employment and training, and
dependency management, and they contribute to the fight against exclusion and poverty.
Within the social economy and social enterprises, Work Integration Social Enterprises are examples of actors that play a
key role in fighting poverty and exclusion. These enterprises organise economic activities with the clear and specific mission
of facilitating the social and professional integration of persons with disabilities or persons in vulnerable situations. There
are, of course, many other types of social enterprises also working to address these problems.
14 More information about Lanzaderas available at http://www.lanzaderasdeempleo.es/, consulted on 27th
May 2016.

12. 12
The role of the social economy and social enterprises is crucial to improve social inclusion and reduce poverty.
This should be emphasised, clearly communicated and supported by the European Commission.
3. The humanitarian crisis, inclusion and integration of migrants and refugees
The European Union is currently struggling to find a solution to the ongoing humanitarian crisis. Asylum seekers who are
granted refugee status encounter many obstacles; in particular, they face barriers to inclusion and integration. Public authorities
have conventionally been left with the responsibility of dealing with migration issues. However, the on-going refugee crisis
has highlighted the inadequacy of traditional strategies for dealing with migrants and the need to rethink these strategies.
In this context, there is no doubt that entrepreneurship in social economy forms contributes to a higher offer of structures
aimed at these vulnerable groups and contains the right level of care and autonomy.15
Many NGOs and social cooperatives
such as Camelot 16
in Italy not only provide guidance to refugees but also offer languages courses, training and internships in
enterprises. Social Impact in Germany has developed a start-up coaching programme for migrants that aims to assess their
desire and ability to become, and stay, self-employed. In Berlin, the social enterprise Kiezküchen 17
facilitates the integration
of refugees by putting them into contact with local hotel and catering businesses that are in need of workers. These two
concrete examples illustrate a bottom-up approach to addressing societal problems and a ‘general interest’ rationale that
characterises social enterprises and is emerging across several countries in Europe.
The last Communication from the Commission on the refugee crisis reminds us that “there are over 60 million refugees
or internally displaced people across the globe – the most severe refugee crisis since the Second World War”.18
In this situation, Member States can benefit from the increased mobilisation of the social economy and social
enterprises, allowing them to contribute to the better integration of refugees: As organised undertakings, their
activities complement the possible actions of the public sector and the spontaneous demonstrations of solidarity shown
by citizens, and they also enjoy greater trust and credibility in providing services than purely profit-based businesses.
4. An increasingly territorial and community based economy
Because the social economy and social enterprises often originate from citizen initiatives or local economic actors, they
are deeply rooted in their territories of origin. Social economy actors mostly look for solutions to local needs. This explains
the very low rate of job dislocation in the social economy and among social enterprises, while at the same time posing some
questions regarding the replication of social enterprises’ best practice across territories. The social economy and social enter-
prises play a key role for local and regional authorities who can directly benefit from the added-value or new ideas, solutions
and approaches to unforeseen or unavoidable problems that they create, whether this comes in the form of generating wealth
and social connections or the production of new goods and services.
Local and regional authorities have both a direct interest and an important role to play in creating favourable conditions
for the social economy and social enterprises in their territories. Consequently, many of the recommendations contained
in this report refer explicitly to the role of local and regional authorities in putting the recommendations into practice.
Policies concerning social enterprises need to be co-created by entrepreneurs and the relevant level of power.
The various European networks19
of local and regional authorities are particularly well placed to spread the
message to these decision makers and complement the efforts of Member States in this respect.
15 OECD LEED, Call for initiatives – local responses to welcoming refugees: from reception to integration, https://refugeelocalwelcome.wordpress.com/
category/by-type-of-organisation/social-enterprise/, consulted on 27th
May 2016.
16 CooperativaSocialeCamelot,https://refugeelocalwelcome.wordpress.com/2015/12/14/cooperativa-sociale-camelot-integrated-system-of-first-hos-
pitality-actions-for-adult-and-unaccompanied-minor-asylum-seekers-in-ferrara-and-bologna/
17 http://www.bildungsmarkt.de/news/das-projekt-hospitality-ausbildung-im-berliner-gastgewerbe-fuer-gefluechtete-menschen-bei-der-oecd-vorgestellt/
18 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council “State of play of implementation of the priority actions under the
European Agenda on Migration”. COM (2016) 85 final.
19 For more information - See Annex 3.

13. 13
5. Gender equality
Numerous studies have shown the importance of fighting gender discrimination as a way to improve both the finan-
cial performance and social impact of any organisation.20
Every organisation should support gender equality internally and
externally, but the social economy and social enterprises have to be exemplary in this regard, as their vision and objectives
are very often based on values such as solidarity and equality.
Women more often hold senior positions in social enterprises than in traditional SMEs.21
In the United Kingdom for
instance, 40 % of social enterprises were managed by women in 2015, compared to only 18 % in traditional SMEs.22
However,
these efforts need to be sustained, especially if social enterprises wish to keep their reputation as agents of positive and
progressive change in the European Union. In this regard the European Commission and the various levels of authority in the
Member States must support them. This means putting in place tailored measures aimed at improving access to funding
and strengthening women’s leadership and managerial skills. These include enhancing self-confidence, conducting additional
research and collecting more data on women’s participation in the social economy and social enterprises, and increasing
access to information and the availability of mentoring programmes and support structures.
Following its Strategy for equality between women and men (2010-2015), the European Commission introduced a Strategic
Engagement for Gender Equality 2016-2019.23
Social enterprises have a specific responsibility in terms of gender equality and they need to lead by example
in society. Therefore gender equality should be a principle at the core of recruiting and career development
policies in the social economy and in every social enterprise: the right of women to access the same opportunities
and resources as men, and women’s decision-making capacities cannot be overlooked by social enterprises, as this would
considerably weaken the overall potential of communities and societies.
Stepping stones for the social economy
and social enterprises
In addition, over the past few years, three new trends have emerged to create opportunities for the further development
of the social economy and social enterprises in Europe and beyond. Although they represent prospects for growth, innovation
and competitiveness for the European Union, led by a stronger citizenship, they also create new risks for modern society.
1 Collaborative economy
The collaborative economy is generating considerable interest among people and enterprises. The advent of online
platforms has greatly facilitated sharing and the exchange of services between individuals. This collaborative economy
requires new forms of social relationships. It helps tackle the physical, economic and social isolation of rural areas, which
makes it of particular interest to social enterprises. Social entrepreneurs have the potential to trigger a great number of
important initiatives in this field thanks to their deep territorial roots and their ability to reinforce social links. However, as
with any kind of economic practice, the collaborative economy can be engaged to benefit just a few, or for the improvement
of society as a whole.
Social enterprises are currently lagging behind when it comes to engaging with the collaborative economy. There is a
window of opportunity, but governments at the national, regional and local levels need to help the social economy and social
enterprises become frontrunners in this area.
20 ICRW, Acumen, Women and social enterprises, how gender integration can boost entrepreneurial solutions to poverty, http://www.icrw.org/sites/
default/files/publications/Acumen%20Report.pdf, 2015.
21 Pour La Solidarité, L’accès des femmes aux postes à responsabilité en Europe, Bonnes pratiques et recommandations pour les entreprises sociales
et classiques, Etudes et Dossiers, Mars 2016.
22 Social Enterprise UK, State of Social Enterprise Survey 2015, p 4.
23 European Commission, Strategic Engagement for Gender Equality 2016-2019, http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/documents/160111_
strategic_engagement_en.pdf, 2015.

14. 14
The Communication from the Commission on upgrading the single market reminds us that the collaborative economy
“provides growth opportunities for innovative start-ups and existing European enterprises, both in their home country
and across borders.”24
The social economy and social enterprises have significant potential for innovation and performance in the
collaborative economy. But there is a need for increased awareness and concrete actions in Member States to
help these enterprises reach their full potential in this regard.
In particular, social enterprises need assistance in mastering the complex tools of digitalisation, such as online platforms.
2. Circular economy
The circular economy has emerged within the larger context of sustainable development initiatives. It addresses envi-
ronmental needs and works as a loop within a given territory. Its goal is to produce goods and services while reducing the
consumption and waste of raw materials and non-renewable energy. The steps of eco-design, product reuse and repair,
waste reuse and recycling that characterise this new form of economy all require technological and social innovations that
are primarily supported by social enterprises.
According to RREUSE25
– a network representing social enterprises active in reuse, repair and recycling – 77% of EU
citizens would rather repair their products than buy new ones, while at least 60% are happy to buy second-hand items of all
sorts. However, consumers mostly replace or throw away their products because the costs of repair are too high. In addition to
the contribution of this large network, promising initiatives are also emerging. The social enterprise Fairphone is an interesting
example.26
This organisation produces ethical smartphones by maximising social impact at all stages of the value chain,
notably with the use of conflict-free minerals in production. Spare parts and repair tutorials are available to customers, who
are encouraged by Fairphone to replace their devices only at the end of their lifespan.
According to the Communication from the Commission on an action plan for circular economy: “SMEs, including social
enterprises, will make a key contribution to the circular economy.” 27
It is important to recognise that in several Member States the social economy and social enterprises have
been pioneers in the circular economy and they continue to be frontrunners. The EU and the Member States could
benefit even more from the innovative capacity of social enterprises in developing the circular economy if appropriate
support and assistance were to be made available to allow them to unleash their full potential.
3 Inclusive business
In 2015, G20 leaders endorsed the G20 Inclusive Business Framework28
(IBF), followed in 2016 by the launch of the
Global Platform on Inclusive Business. According to the IBF, inclusive businesses are commercial organisations that address
“people living at the base of the (economic) pyramid, making them part of the value chain of enterprises´ core business as
suppliers, distributors, retailers, or customers.” They may also pursue broader socially-inclusive goals and should promote
economic, social and environmental development. There are three types of Inclusive Business Approaches: inclusive business
models, inclusive business activities and social enterprise initiatives.
The emerging international debate on the (financial) tools and mechanisms to help inclusive businesses to unlock their
potential, makes it imperative that the European Commission, the Members States and third country partners
carefully assess the intrinsic differences in terms of goals, values and governance between social enterprises
and inclusive business models and activities, in order to avoid treating companies interested primarily in profit
equally with those for whom profit is just a means to a social end.
24 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions, Upgrading the Single Market: more opportunities for people and business – COM (2015) 550 final.
25 RREUSE, http://www.rreuse.org/, consulted on October 3rd, 2016.
26 CEPS, The circular economy: barriers and opportunities for SMEs, No. 412, September 2015, pp 15-17.
27 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions, Closing the loop – An EU action Plan for the circular economy. COM(2015) 614 final.
28 http://g20.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/G20-Inclusive-Business-Framework.pdf

15. 15
Working methods, goals and themes addressed
During its seventh meeting, which took place on 16 September 2015, GECES was invited to discuss and present recom-
mendations for the further development of European policies in favour of the social economy and social enterprises. A new
working method was endorsed by GECES that reflects the European Commission’s desire to adopt a more bottom-up approach,
fostering a process of co-creation.
GECES worked in plenary session and in working groups that focused on four different areas, led by individual rapporteurs
and a rapporteur général. The rapporteurs and the rapporteur général are presented in annex 1.
GECES was convened for six meetings between September 2015 and October 2016, organised with the support of the
European Commission.
The following sections of the report are dedicated to the four themes studied and are illustrated by best practices, which
are included in the annexes and in supporting documents available on the Commission website.
The first section argues that, if we are to develop a level playing field, it will be necessary to increase the visibility,
understanding and recognition of the social economy and social enterprises in Europe. Despite their real weight in the
economy and contribution to the well-being of Europe, social enterprises remain invisible for the most part: often they are
visible only to specific communities and fail to reach out to a mainstream audience. This shortcoming is linked to three
interrelated key concepts: visibility, identity and recognition. All three of these dimensions and the dynamism between them
need to be taken into account in order to overcome the problem. This perspective has guided the work on recommendations
for increasing visibility and recognition that are presented later in this report, but is also a relevant conceptual framework for
understanding the challenges in designing and promoting an agenda in favour of social enterprises and the social economy
in general.
Figure 1. Key concepts for raising awareness about social enterprise in Europe and related actions
Social entrepreneurship:
attitudes, skills, activities
Social enterprise: A variety of legal forms,
business models and activities
Political agenda
Organisational communication
(incl. media relations)
Research and evidence base
(incl. statistics)
Communication
(on activities and impact)
Representation (‘voice(s)’)
and cooperation
Scaling-up and
adaptation
Networks and clusters
By trusted organisations,
general public, public
authorities
Impact
reporting
Common values
(principles, aims, interests,
features, ways of working)
Transparency,
accountability
and credibility
VISIBILITY
RECOGNITION IDENTITY

16. 16
The second section encourages the development of a European economic environment that facilitates access to funding
for social enterprises and the social economy at large. The financial needs of the different enterprises fulfilling the SBI criteria
are varied – this should be the starting point for the development of instruments, both public and private, to finance the
social economy and social enterprises. Financial needs and circumstances also differ between Member States, as they vary
according to their level of development. Financial institutions and policy-makers are not always aware of this diversity and
tend to provide one-size-fits-all responses. Furthermore, social enterprises themselves may not know how to access funding
and may not have the business skills to present their case adequately. As stated in the Luxembourg Presidency conference
“Boosting social enterprises in Europe” in December 2015, there is an urgent need to develop an adequate European financial
ecosystem capable of providing effective support for social innovation and the social economy, including social enterprises.
The current deficiencies in the ecosystem that prevent social enterprises from accessing funding, and how to overcome these,
have guided the development of recommendations on this topic. For ease of reading, technical recommendations associated
with this section, which complement the general ones, are provided in the annexes.
The third section focuses on the need for an adequate legal framework for European the social economy and social
enterprises and on the identification of appropriate and reliable solutions to be used in order to fully exploit internal market
opportunities and deliver social outcomes. This section also discusses the best ways to take advantage of the new Public
Procurement Directive to facilitate social enterprise development. The difficulties in applying the de minimis regulation and
SGEI Decision for social enterprises are investigated and positive practices are highlighted and solutions proposed. This section
also addresses mutuals and cooperatives, structures that have an added value for the European economy and society as a
whole, but which face multiple legal and regulatory barriers.
Finally, the last section of the report concentrates on how the EU can increase its involvement in supporting social
enterprises across the world, in particular in the context of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
This section, notably, discusses ways to improve the evidence base on the social economy and social enterprises and specific
support existing outside the EU. Another point addressed is how to foster global collaboration among international actors
and donors to help create better support structures locally. Lastly, the section focuses on how the EU can strengthen external
policies and initiatives that promote economic development in accession countries, neighbours and other third countries by
including social enterprise support mechanisms.
All the working groups formulated their recommendations in such a way as to make them as useful and efficient as
possible. The recommendations are aimed at several target audiences - the European Commission, the Member States
(including local and regional authorities), the social finance ecosystem and international organisations active in the field, as
well as the social economy and social enterprise community. They are decisive and fundamental, and their goal is to make
social enterprises move forward, building on EU best practices and the experience of Member State representatives and
social entrepreneurs.

17. 17
The recommendations presented within the fol-
lowing four chapters constitute a strong set of
measures to be considered and implemented
both at EU and national/sub-national level. The
European Commission is invited to examine the
recommendations carefully and to use its right
of initiative in order to establish a concrete and
comprehensive EU-level roadmap for the com-
ing years to boost the development of the social
economy and social enterprises beyond the cur-
rently ongoing actions, mainly initiated within the
framework of the 2011 SBI. The Member States
and their local and regional authorities, as well
as organisations representing the social economy
and social enterprises, are all invited to play their
part in putting this new agenda into practice at
every level of society.
REPORT
RECOMMENDATIONS

18. 18
Increasing the visibility and recognition of social enterprises and strengthening their identity can contribute to their enhanced
positive social and societal impact. This impact differs depending on the community or group in question, for instance:
• For social entrepreneurs and practitioners: increased visibility and recognition will allow them to increase sales and
contracts from, and partnerships with both private and public markets and attract talent, finance, and support. It is also
conducive to the creation of stronger networks of practitioners with an increased capacity to act as a group.
• For public administrators, the impact would be double: at the policy-making level and the ‘buying social’ level. Firstly,
policymakers with an increased understanding of the nature, diversity and role of the social enterprise community are
able to make more relevant and effective policies. Secondly it will also lead to a better use of socially responsible public
procurement.
• For different sub-groups of the general public it would involve harnessing a different dimension in entrepreneurship;
supporting social enterprises by purchasing their products and services; contributing to funding; accessing volunteering
and career opportunities; and ultimately becoming active citizens as ambassadors or advocates of this “other way of
creating wealth”.
• Regarding exchange across sector borders (private, public and civic), more visibility could result in an increased
exchange of mutually beneficial joint actions, lessons learnt and joint development strategies between these sectors,
thereby strengthening their combined impact on society.
An important dimension to consider is the scale and level at which the visibility of social enterprises is addressed. Improv-
ing visibility at local, national or European level requires different strategies and, accordingly, different measures and actions.
As regards making communication a central part of social enterprises’ organisational functions, new resources
should be devoted and knowledge shared about the communications process. In this sense, communication departments at
universities and communication agencies are important allies in the effort to awaken a community that has been dormant
for too long with respect to the power of communications.
Lastly, there is an important aspect of the invisibility of social enterprises that is rarely mentioned: their political
dimension. Social enterprises represent different models of creating value for society as a whole and so, to some extent,
they may be perceived as questioning the status quo and the rationale of some traditional firms, especially those that only
focus on the financial bottom line, rather than the social or environmental. Moreover, as they are very often connected to
social and solidarity economy networks seeking to improve conditions for disfavoured groups, society in general and/or the
planet, they represent a counter-power to some mainstream practices and policies.
In this context, actions aiming at facilitating the articulation of voices from the social enterprise community will allow
for the much needed inclusion of well-respected community members in debates and discussions pertaining directly to them.
This articulation represents a much needed prerequisite for three potential contributions that social enterprises can make to
society: a) advocacy; b) provision of needs and transformative action; and c) co-construction with public authorities and the
traditional business sector.
TOWARDS INCREASED VISIBILITY,
RECOGNITION AND IDENTITY
CHAP TER 1

19. 19
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations in this section are presented in three strategic areas, which link to the three interlinked dimensions of
visibility, identity and recognition as previously described in this report:
1. Developing a sharper picture and stronger messages (visibility);
2. Nurturing a more assertive community (identity);
3. Supporting stronger place in public policies and actions at all levels (recognition).
Developing a sharper picture and stronger messages
Greater visibility requires better knowledge and better communication. To fully harness the potential of the social economy
and social enterprises, they need to be more visible towards political decision-makers, funders, mainstream businesses and
the general public. This will only be possible if a more accurate picture is available and it is communicated better than has
been the case thus far.
Specifically, a better understanding is needed of what the social economy and social enterprises do and could contrib-
ute to social, environmental and economic well-being and how this contribution can be assessed and supported by policies.
Recommendation 1: The European Commission, the Member States and social enterprise organisations shall gather
stronger evidence on social enterprises’ added value and communicate it better. Actions should encompass:
• Collecting systematic data and prioritising research on the economic and social importance, including the
employment potential, as well as the dynamics of social enterprises (Member States, Commission);
• Co-creating an EU-wide communication strategy (Commission together with the Member States and social
enterprise organisations);
• Sharing of know-how and tools on social added value, including tools on social impact management (Commis-
sion, the Member States, social enterprise organisations);
• Building better capacity to report on the social value generated (social enterprise organisations).
Recommendation 1 encourages the Commission and the Member States to collect systematic data on the economic
and social importance and dynamics of social enterprises. This should include a double dynamic: on the one hand, the
progressive incorporation of social enterprises within national satellite accounts for the social economy where they exist
and, on the other hand, encouraging the creation of satellite accounts on the social economy by national statistical offices
where they do not exist yet. The Commission (Eurostat) should include this data in EU-level comparisons. Furthermore, the
Commission should, in partnership with the Member States, support the production and regular updating of progress reports
about the state and development of the social economy and social enterprise community and its ecosystem at the EU,
national and local levels. These reports should be prepared and produced jointly with universities and research organisations,
practitioners, international organisations and public administrations that have worked in the field.

20. 20
The Commission should also encourage the Member States and regions to increase the capacity of their research com-
munities, including through cross-country and inter-regional comparisons, stock-taking and mapping exercises, and to engage
more intensively in the evaluation of public policies and actions.
At the EU level, various European Commission services and other EU bodies should better coordinate their research
activities, with a focus on both fundamental and applied research, in order to build a sound evidence base that can inform
policy design at European and national levels.
Furthermore the Commission should strengthen and support the sharing of know-how and tools on how to demon-
strate the social added value of social enterprises. This includes dissemination of good practice in designing, planning,
implementing, measuring, monitoring, and reporting on their social impact and social added value. As part of this effort, the
Commission could encourage social enterprises to implement the recommendations from the GECES sub-group on social
impact and social added value measurement.29
Finally the Commission is also invited to consider the feasibility of an EU-wide communication strategy co-designed
and co-created by all stakeholders using a participatory method and partnership approach. This strategy should aim to high-
light the social impact and social added value of the social economy and social enterprises and could include, for example,
the following elements:
a. A general narrative and visual identity for social enterprises in the context of all related concepts (social economy, social
entrepreneurship, social innovation, etc.) backed up by basic data and concrete examples of their contribution to the soci-
oeconomic development of Europe and its regions, including examples from the various types of organisational forms.
b. An assessment of the costs and benefits of actions, and the identification of actions to make the most of social enter-
prise labels and registers, both in terms of promoting their visibility in general as well as being used pro-actively, for
example by making it easier for public authorities to recognise the value offered by social enterprises in the context of
public procurement.
c. An assessment of the role and achievements of existing dissemination initiatives by organisations and networks30
(Internet portals, newsletters, etc.) to inform about the actions taken by the Commission and other actors to support the
social economy and social enterprises in order to develop better synergies in the future.
d. A media strategy that creates sustainable links with media representatives and opinion leaders, including traditional
media and new channels.
e. A high-visibility recurring event (e.g. European Year of Social Entrepreneurship, European Social Enterprise Week, possi-
bly connected to the Global Entrepreneurship Week) that would be built upon information, mobilisation and networking
events in all Member States.
f. A system that connects this action to the various events and initiatives happening at the local level so as to increase
the European dimension of the social economy and social enterprises. This needs to be done in partnership with local
networks and actors, so as to reach social entrepreneurs on the ground and spread the use of European, national and
regional tools, as well as the communication tools that are available to support their activity and to initiate the transfer
of best practice.
Social enterprises and their representatives are invited to invest more in their capacity to demonstrate their social
impact and social added value and take ownership of the process. This requires better coordination with other social
enterprise players, skills and training, recognised methodologies, as well as a process of bottom up co-creation in order to
reach a critical mass of social enterprises that present appealing stories supported by reliable data. Member States and local
administrations should facilitate and support this capacity building.
29 GECES, Proposed approaches to Social Impact Measurement in European Commission legislation and in practice relating to EuSEFs and the EaSI,
http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/proposed-approaches-to-social-impact-measurement-in-european-commission-legislation-and-in-practice-relat-
ing-to-eusefs-and-the-easi-pbKE0414665/, June 2014.
30 Including CECOP, COOPERATIVES EUROPE, DIESIS, ENSIE, EUCLID, EVPA, REVES, Social Economy Europe, Social Innovation Community, Social Platform,
SME platform, Social Value International, to name but a few.

21. 21
Nurturing a more assertive community
The social economy and social enterprise community needs the capacity to voice its views and share its knowledge and
experience so as to have a public presence at EU level. Furthermore, social economy and social enterprise actors should be
able to combine their experience and knowledge in order to leverage and promote their use by other stakeholders in Europe.
Recommendation 2: The European Commission, the Member States, regional and local authorities, and social
enterprise organisations should nurture a more assertive and coordinated social enterprise community. Actions
should encompass:
• Forging legitimate, diverse and inclusive representative networks that enable synergies, mutual learning and
coordination (social enterprise organisations);
• Supporting the representation of the social enterprise community at the EU level (Commission together with
social enterprise organisations and the Member States);
• Promoting a culture of policy co-creation with social enterprises and their representative organisations (Member
States).
This recommendation directly concerns social enterprises and their representative organisations. To voice their
interests efficiently at all levels, they should recognise the variety of social enterprise actors and build legitimate
representative networks and alliances at regional, national and EU level. The ultimate goal is to enable synergies,
mutual learning and coordination, with a view to developing advocacy strategies aimed at various economic and political
interlocutors.
This bottom-up effort should be supported by the European Commission via financial support for EU-level knowledge
and experience sharing, networking and representation. Furthermore the Commission should engage in systematic dia-
logue and strategic partnership with social enterprises and their representative organisations, actively working to co-create
social enterprise policies and initiatives that are co-managed by stakeholders.
At the national and local levels, Member States, as well as their local and regional authorities, should promote a culture
of co-creation by systematically involving social enterprises and their representative organisations in the design
and implementation of strategies, policies and actions in this field. Needless to say, increasing the visibility of social
enterprises will result in an increased awareness of the social economy at large.

22. 22
Supporting a stronger place for social enterprises
in public policies and actions at all levels
Following the SBI, social enterprises have been taken into consideration in the design of several EU programmes and tools.
It is time to make full use of these opportunities. Similarly, at national/sub-national level, social enterprises need to be
systematically recognised and promoted in relevant policies and actions. Notably, social entrepreneurship should be better
embedded in educational curricula and reflected by services that advise people on their career transitions.
Recommendation 3: The European Commission and Member States, as well as their local and regional authorities,
should mainstream the social enterprise dimension in relevant policies, programmes and practices. They should
consult with and engage social enterprises as much as possible in the creation of new policies and actions. Social
enterprise organisations should actively promote and use these opportunities. Actions should encompass:
• Including social enterprises as eligible entities in all relevant European funding programmes and adding social
enterprise dimensions in the implementation and follow up of EU-wide policy initiatives (European Commission);
• Promoting the participation of social enterprises in relevant European mobility schemes (European Commission);
• Promoting mutual learning and capacity building between regional/local authorities so as to develop integrated
strategies supporting social enterprises (European Commission and Member States);
• Applying social criteria to public procurement processes (European Commission);
• Including social enterprise related topics in curricula from primary to university level and promoting career
opportunities in social enterprises by public employment services and career guidance services (Member States
and local and regional authorities);
• Promoting mutual knowledge sharing and business relations between traditional business and social enterprises
(European Commission, Member States, social enterprises).
Recommendation 3 focuses on the need to place the social economy and social enterprises on the European landscape
by urging the European Commission to explicitly mention the social economy and social enterprises as eligible entities in all
relevant European funding programmes. This also concerns explicitly including a social enterprise dimension in the implemen-
tation and follow-up of European-wide action plans, such as the Small Business Act (SBA). To this end the SBA Performance
Review should include monitoring the state, development and dynamics of social enterprises.
In tandem, the Commission should actively promote the participation of the social economy and social enter-
prises in relevant European mobility schemes (e.g. Erasmus+ and Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs) and in European
cooperation among educational institutions (e.g. universities involved in developing a European Master’s in Social Enterprise
and transnational social enterprise apprenticeships).
In order to facilitate capacity building the Commission should support mutual learning between regional/local
authorities so as to help to put in place integrated strategies supporting social enterprises. This should be done by
developing tools and methods for public authorities and social enterprises’ representatives to co-create actions and gather
good practice. The Commission should also consider launching, together with the representatives and networks of local and
regional authorities, a European-wide “social enterprise cities” campaign promoting local development strategies that include
partnerships between local authorities, social enterprises and relevant support organisations.
A critical aspect for the Commission would be to lead by example and use social criteria in the Commission’s own
public procurement practices as widely as possible, training its own public servants and spearheading an effort to have
more transparent, fair and efficient contracts. It is important that this process be communicated to the Member States and
other stakeholders so as to raise awareness about the importance of doing this at all public administration levels.

23. 23
Member States, as well as their local and regional authorities, should encourage educational institutions to include
social enterprise related topics in curricula, making use of the “European Entrepreneurship Competence and Sense
of Initiative Framework.”31
They should reflect on the issue of school curricula, from primary level onwards, covering the
social economy and social enterprises. Furthermore, public employment services and career guidance services should
promote career paths in social enterprises, including social services, to students and jobseekers, emphasising the
traditions of collective and participatory forms of social enterprises in Europe.
Member States should also develop and make available high-quality support services for social enterprises at
all stages of their life cycle. This should notably include support for the development of the leadership capabilities of
founders and managers of social enterprises, to prepare them to scale up their activities.
All stakeholders should promote mutual knowledge sharing and business relations between traditional business
and social enterprises32
, including local competitiveness clusters, sustainable private procurement and pro bono
advice services, harnessing the potential of intrapreneurship in creating synergies with and support for social enterprises.
Member States should also use the potential of social entrepreneurship in supporting the development of an entrepre-
neurial culture. To this end, they could provide more dedicated funding to universities, intermediaries, informal educational
organisations and educational programmes in the area of social enterprise, the social economy and social entrepreneurship.
Increased support for educational programmes focusing on social enterprise is required to inspire social entrepreneurs to
get started.
31 The Entrepreneurship Competence Framework, https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-scientific-and-technical-research-reports entrecomp-entre-
preneurship-competence-framework, European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2016.
32 The study which will be carried out for the European Commission in 2017, followed by a conference in 2018 («SBI follow-up: cooperation between
social economy enterprises and traditional enterprises») will help to understand this important topic, with concrete recommendations for action.

24. 24
A
s stated at the Luxembourg Presidency conference “Boosting social enterprises in Europe” in December 2015, there
is an urgent need to develop an adequate financial ecosystem capable of providing effective support for social
innovation and social economy organisations, including social enterprises. This chapter provides concrete policy rec-
ommendations to the European Commission, Member States, regional and local authorities, the general funding community
(including public authorities), as well as the social economy and the social enterprise funding community, aimed at encouraging
and enabling an ecosystem to improve access to funding for social enterprises within Europe.33
In many Member States, private funding is not available in sufficient supply due to a lack of visibility and understanding
of social enterprise within the mainstream funding community. This is compounded further by persistent regulatory hurdles
and a lack of incentives associated with investing in social enterprise. Public funding, as payment for a service provided, is of
vital importance. This is the main source of funding for social enterprises that provide services of general interest contracted
out by public authorities and, in many countries, for work integration social enterprises also. GECES would like to highlight that
the provision of services of general interest (such as social, health and education services) is a public authority’s responsibility.
When public authorities decide to outsource the provision of these essential services, public funding should remain the main
source of funding, and public authorities remain accountable for the provision of services, even when they decide not to deliver
them directly. They also remain responsible for monitoring and evaluating service delivery, involving users and beneficiaries
too. In many Member States, work integration social enterprises receive public funding to pursue their activities. It is important
that this kind of public investment continues and is not jeopardised by austerity policies, as has happened in recent years.
Financial needs and circumstances also differ between Member States – for example social enterprises that work for
the social and work integration of persons with disabilities or disadvantages (WISE) rely on public funding in some countries,
are integrated in the private market in others, and often use a mix of financing. Financial needs also vary according to their
level of development (conceptual support, development of pilot projects or prototypes, large-scale development).
Access to funding that supports (social) innovation along the whole chain is important, responding to the need to
shift from experimentation with new approaches, including their evaluation and transferability, to the sustainability in the
medium and long term of proven meaningful innovations. Funding (both private and EU funds) tends to be available mostly
in the experimentation phase.
There is a need to promote a shift from a project-based approach to long-term strategies that include social inno-
vation, as well as to ensure the continuity and financial sustainability of services in a context where public funding is
decreasing in many Member States. Social enterprises have a primary social mission and therefore often give the impression
to creditors or potential investors that they are higher-risk and are less profitable than other businesses. Furthermore, social
enterprises tend to be small, often lacking the internal capacity necessary to prepare business plans and draft sound financial
projections required by financial intermediaries to provide financing.
33 More technical details on how to implement the recommendations can be found in the Annex, and a more detailed account on “Improving access to
funding” can be found in the GECES subject paper on the topic.
IMPROVING ACCESS TO FUNDING 33
CHAP TER 2

25. 25
Finally, due to their size, the financing amounts that most social enterprises need are relatively small, which means that
financial intermediaries incur high transaction costs compared to the size of funding provided. In addition, exit scenarios are
often missing, as it is difficult for social enterprises to return investments at the level of at least capital repayment.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations in this section address the main needs/deficiencies that prevent social enterprises from accessing funding,
namely:
1. Capacity building needs – social enterprises need to learn how to find, attract and communicate with funders;
2. Financing/funding needs – appropriate types of funding may be lacking;
3. Infrastructure needs – structural issues may prevent social enterprises from accessing funding.
Improving capacity building to help social enterprises
find, attract and communicate with funders
Capacity building needs are closely linked to funding. At the pre-start up and start-up stage, the management team of a
social enterprise may lack certain skills and experience, including those associated with accessing and utilising specific types
of funding, or so that the social enterprise can become financially self-sustainable. Furthermore, social enterprises often do not
know how, and do not have the networks, to find, attract and communicate with funders. At an early-growth stage, social
enterprises need assistance to professionalise processes and functions. Finally, at a later growth stage, social enterprises
would benefit from investment readiness support, and support in creating exit scenarios.
Recommendation 4: The European Commission and Member States should provide increased resources to training
programmes, incubators and intermediaries that provide tailored capacity building support to social enterprises,
required to build their managerial skills and to encourage their financial sustainability. Actions should encompass:
• Strengthening European-wide support for networks/platforms that connect individuals (including consultants and
pro-bono experts) with social enterprises needing capacity building, and awards schemes for social enterprises
(Commission);
• Setting up a pan-European investment and capacity building funding programme to help social enterprises reach
investment readiness by financing capacity building support from selected service providers (Commission);
• Financing specialised social enterprise incubators/accelerators and intermediaries that offer training and capacity
building to social enterprises (Member States);
• Using ESIF to fund capacity building activities at MS level (Member States).

26. Recommendation 4 urges the European Commission to strengthen its support for networks, platforms and awards
schemes that aim to build the capacity of social enterprises and provide them with unrestricted funding and promotion.
The European Commission is invited to set up a pan-European investment and capacity building funding programme,
following the example of the UK Investment and Contract Readiness Fund, by defining a list of pre-approved, specialised
service providers that social enterprises can call on to gain access to high-quality and appropriate capacity building support,
financed through the fund. In countries lacking this type of service provider, the Commission could establish a list of criteria
which would guide the establishment of these providers in every country. The objective is to help social enterprises become
investment ready (through the optimisation of business models and the development of business and financial plans, etc.).
Member States are encouraged to engage more directly with local incubators and accelerators, but should finance
only the ones (selected through a competitive process) that are run by professionals with sector expertise, and the ones that
are connected to networks of service providers and funders.
The Commission should encourage Member States to make use of the social economy and social enterprise investment
priorities of the ESIF, to create support mechanisms for the development and scaling-up of the social economy and social
enterprises, capacity building, and the development of partnerships between public authorities, financial institutions, businesses
and social enterprises. Member States should also raise awareness among social enterprises about the possibility of
direct access to funds also within the framework of investment priorities not tailored to them (e.g. investment priorities for
the promotion of employment, social inclusion, equal opportunities, education, energy efficiency and social infrastructures).
Unlocking and attracting more funding that is better
suited to social enterprises
Financing/funding needs relate to how social enterprises, at different stages in their evolution, require different types of
funding, some of which is less easily accessible due to deficiencies in the funding community and a general lack of
availability of appropriate funding.
There is still only a small subset of the funding community – the so-called “impact community” (venture philanthropy
organisations, social impact investment funds, social enterprise incubators, ethical, mutual and cooperative and savings banks,
etc.) – that understands and actively finances social enterprises. The broader funding community – private (mainstream
banks, foundations, high net worth individuals, business angel networks, etc.) and public (EU financing and others) – lack
awareness and understanding of the opportunities and risks of financing social enterprise, and retail investors are often not
even provided with the option of investing in social enterprise by advisors and fund managers.
Furthermore, unnecessary regulatory hurdles exist that decrease potential levels of private funding of social enterprise,
and tax incentives for social enterprise funding are scarce and fragmented across European Member States.
26

27. 27
Recommendation 5: The European Commission, the Member States and organisations from the social enterprise
funding community should implement concrete measures to unlock and attract more funding that is better suited
to social enterprises. Actions should encompass:
• Promotion, training, guidance and awareness building among the broader funding community (private and
public) about how to finance social enterprises (organisations from the social enterprise funding community
to collect best practices and Commission to disseminate);
• Building capacity within the “impact community” that understands and actively finances social enterprises, to
enable social economy-based financial intermediaries to meet the needs of social enterprises;
• Enhancing the suitability criteria of investment in social enterprise, thereby increasing the flow of funds into
social enterprise (Commission and Member States);
• Removing or alleviating regulatory hurdles faced by private funders of social enterprise and social enterprises
themselves (Commission);
• Mapping existing, diverse tax incentives associated with the funding of social enterprise, to disseminate best
practice (Commission and Member States).
Recommendation 5 invites the Commission to actively work to remove siloes between the “impact community” and
the broader funding community – private and public (Member States and public authorities, EU programmes and ESIF), by
raising awareness and increasing the understanding of social enterprise among the broader funding community. This
recommendation would also allow social economy-based financial intermediaries to increase the scale and reach of their
operations, including operating across national boundaries. Concretely, this action implies building stronger links between the
Commission, Member States and organisations representing the social enterprise funding community. In this way, the
latter can collect best practices from the “impact community”, and the Commission and Member States can promote
and disseminate these practices through more traditional funding channels.
The recommendation offers a vision where social enterprise is a natural opportunity for any type of investment,
including retail investments, with full transparency in terms of risk. The Commission is encouraged to develop suitability
requirements under the Markets in Financial Investments Directive (MiFID) to address social and socially-focused invest-
ment, and to work with the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) to develop practical guidelines to support
and develop this area. Member States are invited to work with their financial services regulators and professional bodies to
introduce new, or develop existing, competency frameworks for advisers and fund managers to cover social and social-
ly-focused investment, and to develop standards and practice in relation to suitability criteria for social investment.
GECES is encouraged by the development of solidarity-savings schemes in France that have mobilised EUR 6.8 billion (end
of 2014). The recommendation urges the Commission to undertake consultations as to whether other Member States could
replicate the French solidarity-savings schemes, and calls on eligible Member States to develop guidelines, competency
frameworks and legislation to implement such a system.
In terms of regulatory hurdles, there is a general perception that the costs of the EuSEF structure outweigh the
benefits, which is why GECES welcomes the Commission’s initiative to review the regulation (ahead of schedule). The ongoing
revision of the EuSEF Regulation should be devised in such a way that it provides clear benefits, while reducing the current
costs for the fund manager, with the objective of generating the setting-up of more social investment funds across
Europe (rather than creating additional barriers). Furthermore, the Commission is invited to explore the need to develop criteria
for lighter regulation of donative intent investment, which is currently disproportionately over-regulated, by reviewing
innovative examples in Member States, and developing wider recommendations for a lighter touch approach.
Finally, GECES recommends that the Commission undertake to map existing, diverse tax incentives for investment
support of social enterprise – including philanthropy, to highlight best practice and disseminate the results of this to
Member States, generating greater pan-European consistency and facilitating cross-border investment. The objective is to
develop a system that rewards rather than punishes financing of social enterprise, by recognising the tax savings
that such entities provide.

28. 28
Putting in place mechanisms and infrastructure
that encourage more public funding and
mobilise private funding
Finally, infrastructure needs pertain to the structural issues that currently prevent social enterprises from accessing fund-
ing. The public sector should continue funding social enterprise - public procurement is addressed specifically in Chapter IV.
There is often a misalignment between public policy and the priorities of private donors and investors which leads
to duplication in some areas and inadequate funding in others. As mentioned in the introduction to the section on Improving
access to funding, the provision of services of general interest (such as social, health, education services) is a public authority’s
responsibility. Investing in high-quality services for all pays off: it brings long term societal and sometimes economic gains.
It contributes to the promotion of gender equality and work-life balance, employment, social inclusion, better health and
education; it reduces crime, poverty and inequalities. After the initial cost, these investments usually translate into savings for
public finances in the medium/long term. Not spending on these essential services has a huge cost in the long-run, and it is
almost always more costly to try to engage in damage repair than to invest in long-term, holistic solutions. There is a need to
better define societal challenges so that they are addressed by all the public authorities concerned in a coordinated manner.
By contrast, the public sector should be encouraged to use existing financial instruments to support the participation of
private capital, thus further leveraging available funding, and outsourcing the direct investment to experienced social enter-
prise funders. The social enterprise funding market is still nascent and severely under-resourced in most European countries34
.
In their market-building role, public investors should support private investors in taking on more risk or in getting a
different return on investment than if only the private sector were involved.
Recommendation 6: The European Commission and the Member States should continue to direct public funding
to social enterprise and to use public funding to mobilise private capital, through investment in and de-risking of
social enterprise funders, as well as by putting proper governance structures in place. Actions should encompass:
• Enabling public financial instruments (e.g. EaSI, EFSI, InnovFin under Horizon 2020, COSME and other instru-
ments under development) to enhance funding volumes and raise the quality of social enterprise funding
(Commission) and to invest in social enterprise and specialised intermediaries (Member States);
• Programming the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) to improve service provision and investment
in high-quality social infrastructure. ESIF should have a transformative role and should be used to complement
– not replace – Member States’ national budgets (Commission and Member States);
• Recommend to Member States to promote social investment namely through public funding in a coordinated,
holistic manner in the areas of social, health and education services;
• Developing complementarities between public and private funding of social enterprise through the use of hybrid
instruments (Commission and Member States);
• Representing key stakeholders from the social enterprise ecosystem in the governance of schemes supported
by public funding, such as EFSI, and mainstreaming the use of impact measurement (Commission).
Recommendation 6 urges the Commission to perform an examination and optimisation of existing instruments
supported by the EU budget and implemented by the EIB and EIF to enhance funding volumes offered by financial insti-
tutions/intermediaries and investors, and to better match the funding source and type with the needs of the social
enterprise, including the following suggestions:
34 According to EVPA’s most recent industry survey, most venture philanthropy/social investment funds have annual budgets below EUR 2.5 million.
http://evpa.eu.com/publication/european-venture-philanthropy-and-social-investment-20132014-the-evpa-survey/

29. 29
• EaSI and/or EFSI - the assessment requests that current programmes be adapted or enhanced to improve their usability
for financial institutions/ intermediaries;
• Consistency of definitions of social enterprise should be ensured between the EIB, EIF and the European Commission,
with a focus on ensuring greater market demand for social enterprise;
• EFSI - promote EuSEFs and other social impact investment funds, as well as the Social Impact Accelerator (SIA) and its
investees among the EFSI’s investment options (e.g. on an equal footing with venture capital or ELTIF funds), ensuring
complementarity with existing instruments already available to support social enterprise funding/investment needs;
• ESIF - use ESIF to develop and test joint financing support schemes that combine grants, loans, guarantees and other
financial instruments, also by pooling together various types of public and private sources, including savings and crowd-
funding, and further exploring synergies between the ESF and ERDF to co-fund joint financial instruments.
GECES urges the Commission to explore ways of providing financial support (long term loans and equity investments)
to financial intermediaries (e.g., investment funds) that directly invest between EUR 100,000 and EUR 500,000 in social
enterprises, or financial advisors that match supply and demand. This should not preclude funding also being made available
to already existing social enterprises that also need sustainable funding and support for accompanying actions.
The Commission should also provide a stronger message to Member States to promote and invest in social enter-
prise, and to support specialised intermediaries (including public/private collaborations and civil society actors) that help
build the social enterprise ecosystem. Member States may explore the use of ESIF to develop and test joint financing
support schemes that combine grants, loans, guarantees and other financial instruments, to encourage the set-up of more
social enterprise seed funds and social impact investment funds. Member States can also use the EFSI to provide guar-
antees and act as co-investors to support the action of social welfare funds in Europe and invest in the EFSI itself, linked
to social business.
Hybrid capital should open up a new spectrum of finance for social enterprises that would otherwise be unable to access
finance. Here, the role of public capital is to provide subsidies/leverage to other forms of capital and act as a catalyst. GECES
invites the Commission to provide catalytic capital for layered fund structures to leverage more private capital into
the financial ecosystem for social enterprises; through a) non-repayable EaSI funds that enable hybrid fund structures to
operate with target returns below nominal capital preservation and/or b) repayable ESIF funds that could act as catalytic
first-loss capital. Furthermore, GECES recommends that the Commission conduct an analysis of the conditions under
which innovative hybrid instruments can be used. This analysis should define a framework to guide policy-makers and
practitioners on potential risks, opportunities and negative consequences, and provide examples of these.
The Commission should ensure that key stakeholders in the social enterprise ecosystem are represented in the govern-
ance of funding schemes, for example the EFSI, by appointing a specialist in social policy as one of the independent experts
in the Investment Committee. In all its funding programmes (e.g. EFSI), the Commission should promote the measurement
of social impact and give it the same status as financial turnover and economic growth, building on the work of the
GECES sub-group on social impact measurement,35
while also collecting/disseminating best practices from practitioners.
35 GECES, Proposed approaches to Social Impact Measurement in European Commission legislation and in practice relating to EuSEFs and the EaSI,
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/social_business/docs/expert-group/social_impact/140605-sub-group-report_en.pdf, June 2014.

30. 30
C
reating and developing an ecosystem where social enterprises can grow, consolidate and thrive is required if they are
to succeed in the internal market and deliver social outcomes. Despite recent progress, many countries still lack the
legal framework needed to encourage the creation, development and sustainability of social enterprises. The devel-
opment of an appropriate framework in Member States is important and should be based on social economy principles
and values as mentioned in the Social Economy Charter (April 2002).36
Legal and regulatory frameworks can clarify the definition of a social enterprise, its mission and activities and
help to open up opportunities for fiscal relief, provision of support and access to public procurement and other markets. Both
policy-makers and investors would benefit from this clarity.
In countries where there is no appropriate legal framework in place, social enterprises may struggle to have their dual
bottom line (social and economic) recognised and may find themselves subject to legal and regulatory frameworks that are
inappropriate. Nevertheless, it is important to carefully evaluate whether new legislation is needed or whether it would be
sufficient to adapt the existing legal framework.
Moreover, social enterprises need to stimulate their cross-border activities. Alternatives to a dedicated European
statute for enterprises such as mutuals, and proposals to overcome the lack of uptake of the European Cooperative Statute
have to be found.
The public procurement reform package adopted at the beginning of 2014, which encourages and enables public
authorities to consider the full life-cycle of products in their purchasing decisions including based on social criteria, needs to
be fully implemented.
Likewise, the Services of General Economic Interest (SGEI) package,37
which gives more flexibility to public author-
ities when providing state aid to social enterprises, needs to be better understood to enable these enterprises to reach their
full potential.
36 Those principles are:
• The primacy of the individual and the social objective over capital;
• Voluntary and open membership;
• Democratic control by the membership;
• Combination of the interests of members/users and/or the general interest;
• Defence and application of the principle of solidarity and responsibility;
• Autonomous management and independence from public authorities;
• Use of most surpluses to pursue sustainable development objectives, services of interest to members or the general interest.
See Déclaration finale commune des organisations européennes de l´Économie Sociale, CEP-CMAF, p 19:
http://www.eesc.europa.eu/resources/docs/qe-30-12-790-en-c.pdf.
37 http://ec.europa.eu/competition/publications/cpn/2012_1_9_en.pdf
IMPROVING THE LEGAL
ENVIRONMENT
CHAP TER 3